Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoY83vCDT16Gv06pnADgSYon4y-YuuOPeu2rjfNf=vMHhA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname  (Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org>)
Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 3:39 PM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Since there hasn't been any agreement on that point, I've just rebased the patch to apply cleanly against the current
master:

This looks OK to me. There may be better ways to do some of it, but
there's no rule against further improving the code later. Also, since
the issue was introduced in v14, we probably shouldn't wait forever to
do something about it. However, there is a procedural issue here now
that we are past feature freeze. I think someone could defensibly take
any of the following positions:

(A) This is a new feature. Wait for v16.
(B) This is a bug fix. Commit it now and back-patch to v14.
(C) This is a cleanup that is OK to put into v15 even after feature
freeze but since it is a behavior change we shouldn't back-patch it.

I vote for (C). What do other people think?

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: John Naylor
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: A qsort template
Следующее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposal for New and improved website for pgjdbc (JDBC) for GSOC 2022